'World Cruising Routes' by Jimmy Cornell

[RTB]

Originally Posted by S/V Alchemy

I'm sure as well. But pilot books in general are predicated on trends established in the long past, as in 200 years in some cases of near-continuous weather records. Averaged out, we get our compass roses of winds and windspeeds in each 5 x 5 degree chunk of ocean.

Weather is getting more variable, or so I read, with dry when it's supposed to be rainy, calm when wind is the norm, and so on. So this is going to be noticed long before it has enough of an effect to justify changing the pilot charts for each month of the year.

Hell, don't believe me. Believe a guy who's raced three times in the Southern Ocean and says it's gotten worse each time:

CBC News - Technology & Science - Ocean changes unsettling to solo sailor

I just sailed from Florida to Colombia this past May. The "Windward Passage" was the "windless passage". Instead of East winds, we had S.W. winds for 6-7 days. We couldn't make Panama, so settled for Cartagena. So much for books, Just gotta go with what you are dealt.

[Adelie]

Originally Posted by cringle

fwiw the 1950 ed of OP comes with some rather lovely large charts of winds, currents and routes of the globe. I'm presently looking to get them copied to put on my wall.

The 1987 version of OP that I have also has the route chart. Or it can be purchased separately as BA Chart 5308 in 550mm x 1100mm size for $25-30.

The best BA chart source I know of is Captain's Nautical Supply at http://www.captainsnautical.com/.

If I were planning a cruise right now I would use OP, Cornell and the US Atlas of Pilot Charts for general planning and back it all up with the specific pilots for the areas to be visited.

Currently AoP Charts are available for free PDF download at Maritime Safety Information , though the editions may be slightly out of date they should still be accurate enough.

More generally Maritime Safety Information has a bunch of US maritime publications available for free down load.

[cringle]

Originally Posted by S/V Alchemy

I'm sure as well. But pilot books ...
Weather is getting more variable, or so I read ...
Hell, don't believe me. Believe a guy who's ...
CBC News - Technology & Science - Ocean changes unsettling to solo sailor

well ... Derek Hatfield and Clouds Badham reckon this and Pauly reckons that. FWIW I know several people who have raced in the southern ocean: in eg the vendee, the barcelona race, the portimao and I don't know anyone who's ever said it's "worse", only that some times are worse than others. Like any sea or weather. But this is all anecdotal.

The article you reference mentions la nina which, with el nino, is a quantifiable meteorological phenomenon although the article does not go into that. What it does have is a bit of anecdote and conjecture mainly alluding to the global warming/climate change nonsense.

Understanding this subject is a scientific undertaking and not trivial, but there is a wealth scientific data out there. If the likes of Badhm were to publish some data instead of indulging in conjecture in a non-scientific medium like "cbc news technology and science" then perhaps he'd have some credibility.

If you have read that weather is getting more variable then I presume you've been reading newspapers rather scientific sources.
The winds and the oceans do what the winds and the oceans always do. There are trends and cycles (like el nino) and sometimes it's wild and sometimes it ain't.

OP is the sum of thousands and thousands and thousands of observations and is good for a looooong time to come.

Since you provided a link I'll reciprocate. I'm a scientist and I like to see the numbers and the analysis. If you are too then you might like to spend some time here Fifth International Conference on Climate Change - 5th International Conference on Climate Change or here http://tinyurl.com/dy2o6c And there are many, many other sources.

If you don't have a scientific background then have a look at this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=stij8sUybx0

Either way, I hope you have good weather this weekend :-)

best to you
C

[cringle]

Originally Posted by Adelie

...
Currently AoP Charts are available for free PDF download at Maritime Safety Information , though the editions may be slightly out of date they should still be accurate enough....

Thank you for that link. I have the book, but it's on the boat. So this is an excellent link to have

C

[Bash]

Originally Posted by cringle

Since you provided a link I'll reciprocate. I'm a scientist and I like to see the numbers and the analysis. If you are too then you might like to spend some time here Fifth International Conference on Climate Change - 5th International Conference on Climate Change or here http://tinyurl.com/dy2o6c And there are many, many other sources

Yikes. That conference was not sponsored by an academic institution, but rather by the Heartland Institute. Here's their mission, taken from their website: Heartland's mission is to discover, develop, and promote free-market solutions to social and economic problems. Such solutions include parental choice in education, choice and personal responsibility in health care, market-based approaches to environmental protection, privatization of public services, and deregulation in areas where property rights and markets do a better job than government bureaucracies.

As an academic, if I were to list such a conference in my annual Faculty Activity Report, I'd be laughed right out of my department.

[Adelie]

Originally Posted by Bash

As an academic, if I were to list such a conference in my annual Faculty Activity Report, I'd be laughed right out of my department.

Just because it was a hack conference and Monkton is not an academic doesn't mean his/their viewpoints are wrong.

Al Gore did his movie and he's a journalist/polititian.

That said few serious climate scientists are opposed to anthropgenic climate change and almost no peer reviewed research is being published opposing it. Much of the research opposing it is being underwritten by groups that have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo or reversing existing environmental legislation.

Doesn't look good in the long term for the deniers, the question that remains is how will global warming affect specific areas and will general conditions like trade winds and monsoons continue to be predictable.

[S/V Alchemy]

Originally Posted by RTB

So much for books, Just gotta go with what you are dealt.

I agree entirely. But a lot of cruising...and provisioning...and insurance...is predicated on predictable seasonal shifts. If the trades start being the anti-trades, or more hurricanes hit Grenada, or we get typhoons hitting California...in January...it will put the cruising lifestyle out of reach for the same reason you can't bicycle on the Autobahn...

[S/V Alchemy]

Cringle, I'll look at those links. I do have a scientific background in the sense of taking science courses in university and being married to a degreed biologist, but I do feel there's a high percentage of vested-interest garbage drawing conclusions from tiny aspects of data. I am also persuaded that the role of the sunspot cycle (for one) is underestimated in current climate modelling.

Meanwhile, the steel boat, powered by sun and wind, and able to make its own water, is looking better all the time.

[cringle]

Originally Posted by Bash

Yikes. That conference was not sponsored by an academic institution, but rather by the Heartland Institute. Here's their mission, taken from their website: Heartland's mission is to discover, develop, and promote free-market solutions to social and economic problems. Such solutions include parental choice in education, choice and personal responsibility in health care, market-based approaches to environmental protection, privatization of public services, and deregulation in areas where property rights and markets do a better job than government bureaucracies.

As an academic, if I were to list such a conference in my annual Faculty Activity Report, I'd be laughed right out of my department.

That probably says more about your department/faculty than either the Heartland Institute, commercial objectives or science. When I was in academia (UK) I was involved in several joint commercial projects and so are many if not most US universites; Caltech, Princeton, MIT all spring to mind. I fail to see how market-based principles have any bearing whatsoever, one way or the other, on the Scientific Method.

If your academic orientation is scientific, perhaps you'd care to point out, or (at the risk of being laughed out of your deptartment) enquire of your colleages, precisely where Prof Lindzen goes wrong in this paper? http://tinyurl.com/yda9q36. In any case, I strongly suggest you actually watch some of those presentations or read some of those studies. If you're a historian or economist or such, then watch the Monkton presentation.

Adelie: A "hack" conference? I've never encountered the term before. Which particular presentations or papers were "hack"? It is a bold one indeed who'd choose such an adjective to describe eg Willie Soon of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, or Richard Lindzen professor of meteorogy at MIT.

While every planet in the solar system - Earth included - did warm up in the latter half of the 20th century, there is no evidence that it was our terrestrial 4x4s and grp boats that were responsible. However, despite an increased use in fossil fuels, since 1998 every planet in the solar system - Earth included - has been cooling down.

I have provided links to a "few serious climate scientists" who have produced research and data which severely discredit anthropogenic GW. Moreover there is a wealth of data opposing AGW; I have posted only a little.

Perhaps the next person who responds can provide some links to some (bone fide, peer reviewed) scientific papers which support the case for anthropogenic global warming? I, for one, would be most interested.

fair winds
C

[sneuman]

Originally Posted by cringle

well ... Derek Hatfield and Clouds Badham reckon this and Pauly reckons that. FWIW I know several people who have raced in the southern ocean: in eg the vendee, the barcelona race, the portimao and I don't know anyone who's ever said it's "worse", only that some times are worse than others. Like any sea or weather. But this is all anecdotal.

The article you reference mentions la nina which, with el nino, is a quantifiable meteorological phenomenon although the article does not go into that. What it does have is a bit of anecdote and conjecture mainly alluding to the global warming/climate change nonsense.

Understanding this subject is a scientific undertaking and not trivial, but there is a wealth scientific data out there. If the likes of Badhm were to publish some data instead of indulging in conjecture in a non-scientific medium like "cbc news technology and science" then perhaps he'd have some credibility.

If you have read that weather is getting more variable then I presume you've been reading newspapers rather scientific sources.
The winds and the oceans do what the winds and the oceans always do. There are trends and cycles (like el nino) and sometimes it's wild and sometimes it ain't.

OP is the sum of thousands and thousands and thousands of observations and is good for a looooong time to come.

Since you provided a link I'll reciprocate. I'm a scientist and I like to see the numbers and the analysis. If you are too then you might like to spend some time here Fifth International Conference on Climate Change - 5th International Conference on Climate Change or here http://tinyurl.com/dy2o6c And there are many, many other sources.

If you don't have a scientific background then have a look at this

Either way, I hope you have good weather this weekend :-)

best to you
C

I was with you - sort of - until you mentioned Monckton, who is a joke. See "a scientist replies to Monckton":

Abraham presentation

[cringle]

Since I presume you have watched the original Monckton presentation from St Paul and I infer you have watched Abraham's presentation, I won't attempt to defend Monckton - he's perfectly capable of doing that for himself. fwiw I would not describe Lord Monckton as "a joke".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z00L2uNAFw8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cO1Q3Npa2tk&NR=1

etc etc and many more links, one link leads on to the next and it all lasts around 2 hours, but worth a watch if you've already watched prof Abraham.

[sneuman]

Originally Posted by cringle

Since I presume you have watched the original Monckton presentation from St Paul and I infer you have watched Abraham's presentation, I won't attempt to defend Monckton - he's perfectly capable of doing that for himself. fwiw I would not describe Lord Monckton as "a joke".

etc etc and many more links, one link leads on to the next and it all lasts around 2 hours, but worth a watch if you've already watched prof Abraham.

When climate change denial rises to the level of the science on the other side, I will listen. For now, it's about at the level of Creationism. Monckton doesn't pass muster.

[cringle]

Since you haven't bothered to look at the science links I posted above, I don't see how you can possibly comment.

I'll infer you haven't looked at *anything* Monckton has done either.

I hope you take a lot more care over analysis of your weather charts than you've taken over this issue.

fair winds
C

[barnakiel]

It is a horrible book and I hope I was never given it.

Publication 136 instead.

b.

[sneuman]

Originally Posted by cringle

Since you haven't bothered to look at the science links I posted above, I don't see how you can possibly comment.

I'll infer you haven't looked at *anything* Monckton has done either.

I hope you take a lot more care over analysis of your weather charts than you've taken over this issue.

fair winds
C

His quite obvious political and religious agenda belies his biased "point of view," such as it is. I will trust the thousands of scientists worldwide who put their profession above their politics.

Again, I find the subject much like Creationism. You believe in climate change or not depending on your pre-existing worldview - if it's an unscientific worldview, you ignore the scientists in favor of rodeo clowns like Glenn Beck and the local Channel 5 weatherman (who probably isn't even a meterologist, let alone a climate scientist). If it were just a matter of opinion, it would be one thing - but it's not. The Creationists are raising and "educating" a generation of scientific know-nothings - the epidemiologists of the future who will not understand how viruses and bacterial "evolve" to evade our best attempts to stop them. Same goes for climate-change deniars - they could be ignored if it wasn't that their ignorant point of view threatened the rest of us.

Moderators - sorry, but I didn't start this foray into the netherworld.